Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21507262›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2011

"GINEXMAL RCT: Induction of labour versus expectant management in gestational diabetes pregnancies".

Gianpaolo Maso, Salvatore Alberico, Uri Wiesenfeld, Luca Ronfani, Anna Erenbourg, Eran Hadar, Yariv Yogev, Moshe Hod, GINEXMAL Study Cooperative Research Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01058772 (GINEXMAL RCT), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01058772 nacompletednot on this map

GINEXMAL RCT: Induction of Labour Versus Expectant Management in Gestational Diabetes Pregnancies

TypeinterventionalSponsorIRCCS Burlo GarofoloRan2010 to 2014Enrolled425ConditionsGestational Diabetes, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetes Mellitus, Gestational, Pregnancy-Induced DiabetesArmsINDUCTION of LABOUR
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gianpaolo MasoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Institute for Maternal and Child Health-IRCCS Burlo Garofolo, Via dell'Istria 65/1, Trieste, Italy. maso@burlo.trieste.it
Salvatore Alberico
Uri Wiesenfeld
Luca Ronfani
Anna Erenbourg
Eran Hadar
Yariv Yogev
Moshe Hod
GINEXMAL Study Cooperative Research Group
IRCCS Materno Infantile Burlo Garofolo · ITRabin Medical Center · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational diabetes (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancies affecting around 7% of women. This clinical condition is associated with an increased risk of developing fetal macrosomia and is related to a higher incidence of caesarean section in comparison to the general population. Strong evidence indicating the best management between induction of labour at term and expectant monitoring are missing. METHODS/

designPregnant women with singleton pregnancy in vertex presentation previously diagnosed with gestational diabetes will be asked to participate in a multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial between 38+0 and 39+0 gestational weeks. Women will be recruited in the third trimester in the outpatient clinic or in the Day Assessment Unit according to local protocols. Women who opt to take part will be randomized according to induction of labour or expectant management for spontaneous delivery. Patients allocated to the induction group will be admitted to the obstetric ward and offered induction of labour via use of prostaglandins, Foley catheter or oxytocin (depending on clinical conditions). Women assigned to the expectant arm will be sent to their domicile where they will be followed up until delivery, through maternal and fetal wellbeing monitoring twice weekly. The primary study outcome is the Caesarean section (C-section) rate, whilst secondary measurements are maternal and neonatal outcomes. A total sample of 1760 women (880 each arm) will be recruited to identify a relative difference between the two arms equal to 20% in favour of induction, with concerns to C-section rate. Data will be collected until mothers and newborns discharge from the hospital. Analysis of the outcome measures will be carried out by intention to treat. DISCUSSION: The present trial will provide evidence as to whether or not, in women affected by gestational diabetes, induction of labour between 38+0 and 39+0 weeks is an effective management to ameliorate maternal and neonatal outcomes. The primary objective is to determine whether caesarean section rate could be reduced among women undergoing induction of labour, in comparison to patients allocated to expectant monitoring. The secondary objective consists of the assessment and comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes in the two study arms. .

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionDiabetes, GestationalLabor, InducedWatchful WaitingAdolescentAdultFemaleGestational AgeHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisPatient SelectionPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeResearch DesignYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21507262
PMCPMC3108319
OpenAlexW2062337152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.